A few have been asking "Why don't we switch to a 4-3" and most have been like myself and have been campaigning for a switch to the 1-gap.

Now, Direckshun has posted a nice breakdown of the difference between the two philosophies, and I'll link that later.

However, the 2-gap isn't a completely flawed scheme. To run it effectively in today's NFL, you need to have DEs like Tyson/Dorsey who are solid against the run but also can diagnose run vs. pass quickly and then provide an adequate pass rush (pushing the pocket or obtaining a double team while still progressing upfield).

For example, the Ravens and Mike Nolan (D-Coordinator for the Falcons) still run a 2-gap philosophy. (Nolan runs a hybrid 3-4 2-gap and a 4-3, but I can talk about that later).The difference is that while the Ravens run the 2-gap (albeit, having their DEs play the 4-tech instead of our 5), they utilize a fire-zone heavy concept. Meaning, they will pull DEs into coverage occasionally and bring pressure from safeties, nickel and dime backs. Their philosophy is to "Rush 5, drop 6".

For those that think our Defense sucks, you're entitled to your opinion but it is wrong. To those that think the 2-gap entirely sucks, you're wrong as well. The main problem with this defense IMO is the inability to get pressure from our base front (3-4 odd, DEs playing the 5-tech). To play our scheme effectively, you need smart DEs who can address the play quickly and accordingly. Simply put, our DEs are not smart enough or talented enough to do so in our base front. Granted, Allan Bailey is fine from our sub package (playing the 3-tech), but can't be relied on in our base front because he doesn't play well against the run or quickly diagnoses run v. pass enough to provide an adequate rush, much like our other DEs.

I know most will just see a wall of text, but this will probably help several understand some of our defensive flaws and why we struggle against the pass in our base set.

Cliffs:
1. Our 2-gap requires players we have not acquired; it can still be effective but is much more difficult to do than a 1-gap philosophy.
2. The responsibilities for a 2-gap DE and NT are much more difficult than those of a 1-gap.
3. I personally would like to see our team go to a 1-gap. Attacking defensive lineman are much better served than run-stoppers in today's NFL.

I know most will tl;dr, but if you disagree with it, post your thoughts. We have too much bitching on this site and not enough discussion about scheme, football philosophies, and concepts.

Though, I still really liked what I saw from last year. The big differences (maybe I'll change that to "huge" differences) between this year and last year, though, are:

1) We need a ****ing DC. Romeo has been slow to adjust. In Atlanta, they repeatedly ran the same pick play on our man-to-man. No adjustment. In San Diego, no excuse not to give Berry a little help when he struggled on Gates early. In San Diego and New Orleans, why did it take so long to realize that stunting our linemen would help create pressure? Too, too, too slow to adjust scheme.

2) Kelly Gregg. He was somewhat invisible, but our Nose Tackle play has been atrocious. And we all know when that happens, everything falls apart. Berry and DJ might play more effectively if the Nose Tackle did his job.

3) Soft players. Our players used to hit offensive players in the mouth. Now they're playing finesse, read and react.

I agree. The 2-gap can work. I don't think it's as much scheme as it is this idiotic idea on Pioli's part to put Romeo in charge of both the team and the defense.

The smart people know that a 2 gap defense is more difficult to play than a one gap defense. That's why it's annoying that we run it.

Even IF you diagnose pass early, respecting the run as a 2 gap lineman has already set you up for failure on your pass rush because you have to play head up on the blocker to make sure you can discard your blocker to either side to play both of your gaps. You essentally end up blocking yourself that way by keeping offensive linemen in front of you instead of getting past them.

It just goes against the fundamental nature of defense...getting OFF blocks and attacking the football.

Yup. Blick, I find myself repeating this to a **** ton of people here and I don't know what the requirements are for a sticky. That is why I made this thread.

As you said the fundamental flaws with the 2-gap is that is designed to stop the run and requires absolute monsters on your front 3 to provide a pass rush. To most of us that have some football knowledge, this is obvious. However, I keep seeing threads about the 4-3 and getting neg repped for telling people to use the search function. So, I make thread that hopefully educates people about defensive philosophies and our scheme. However, it will get buried and nobody will read it anyways.